MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029989241 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.2986

L’accessibilité au fleuve Saint-Laurent : enjeux et perspectives pour une approche intégrée

2005· article· fr· W2029989241 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jean-François Bibeault

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Canada et au Québec, l’accessibilité publique au fleuve constitue un enjeu social majeur, particulièrement dans le contexte d’une gestion intégrée du Saint-Laurent. Toutefois, si le thème fait l’objet de consensus social sur le plan de l’intention, son articulation empirique pose problème. À ce titre, le présent article apporte un éclairage sur les diverses dimensions que recouvre ce thème, soulève les difficultés de mesure et indique les éléments d’un cadre logique pour aborder ce thème dans une perspective de soutien à l’accessibilité au Saint-Laurent.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207